Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Media Outlets Sue Trump Administration; Trumps' Arch will Double as Military Complex; Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) is Interviewed about Trump's Arch; String of Cancer Cases Puts California Community on Edge; A.I. Giants at Center of New Lawsuit. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired September 21, 2026 - 08:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:34:35]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: The breaking news this morning, the legal showdown over the First Amendment and access to the White House. CNN, MS Now and "Politico" are all suing the Trump administration after President Trump banned the outlets reporters from the White House.

Moments ago the president posted in part, quote, "the White House is not instituting an assault on the free press, something which I cherish," he says, "it is instituting an assault on the fake news, something that has grown like cancer in our beloved United States of America."

[08:35:03]

Joining me now, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson.

Let me start with what's happened here.

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.

SIDNER: Reporters, including our Betsy Klein, locked out of their normal places at the White House. They can't get in. They cannot cover him. What do you make of what has happened now and this lawsuit?

JACKSON: So, Sara, what I make of it, most objectively speaking, is how outrageous this is. When we have discussions about legal matters, generally there are close questions. And those close questions are fair. We talk about juries who have to make important decisions. You don't get to, whether you're the president or not, to make unilateral determinations that are offensive to the Constitution.

Now, let me be clear when I say this, number one, there are certain procedural protections. We have something in this country called due process. What does that mean? It means notice and an opportunity to be heard. And the courts have been very clear with respect to saying, if you're going to take action, you have to afford notice. There needs to be the requisite opportunity of the person or persons that you're excluding. And then a decision made on the merits with regard to the basis for that. That's number one. So, in terms of due process, its offensive.

Number two, viewpoint, you don't get to determine. Was it Moynihan (ph) who said, right, we're all entitled to our opinions but not our own facts. You may not like the press coverage. You may think it's unfair. You may think that it could be better. But that's what we call viewpoint discrimination. And the Supreme Court of the United States couldn't have been clearer with respect to content. This is the United States of America, and we have a right to debate and argue and say things outrageously and say things hatefully as long as they're not fighting words, as the courts have determined. But this is just not a topic that we should be addressing in 2026.

And what surprises me is that there are not people around the president to advise him legally with respect to what he's doing. And so, this is a problem.

SIDNER: I do want to ask you what the president said initially, because he said he was blocking some members of the press from accessing the White House as a result of their constant reporting fake news. Now, he has added something. Clearly, it seems he's talked to some folks in the legal department. He is literally calling it a threat to national security.

And if you look at the reporting, it's outrageous. I mean the reporting that he has -- he doesn't like. But he has changed his tact in exactly what he says is the problem. Does that fly? Will that work? Is that an important new addition?

JACKSON: So, it's extremely important because the rationale as to why you're doing something, Sara, is always critical, right? The context matters. Perspective matters. And if you're doing it, and just want to be clear, the White House certainly has operational concerns. You can regulate the decorum of the media, right, with regard to what they're going to do, the procedural mechanisms of how they do it. You ask your question. You stop before you make a follow up. All that's fair. But -- and, of course, national security, buzzwords, right? If it relates to security or public protection, you can do it. I just don't see how this at all relates to that.

And then to have people out there defending this in the press on -- his administration on Sunday citing cases that are totally irrelevant to this, it's just concerning, right? This is -- the heart of this country is based on the First Amendment. It's based on Sara saying something and I say I disagree and here's why. And you saying to me, you're wrong and here's why. And we could have that healthy debate. It's not based upon me excluding you because I don't like what you say or calling it fake news. Fake news is not reporting that I dislike or that hits me to the core against my interest, it's just -- it's problematic, troubling, and it's embarrassing, quite frankly.

SIDNER: Joey Jackson, putting it plain this morning. Do appreciate you.

JACKSON: Thank you, Sara. SIDNER: John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, new this morning, a completely new justification from the president. He now says his proposed hulking 250-foot triumphal arch will be used for drones, snipers and to store large quantities of sniper ammunition.

Let's get right to CNN's senior White House reporter Betsy Klein for the latest on this and maybe why he's all of a sudden saying this will be a security outpost.

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: So, John, imagine this, a highly trafficked D.C. thoroughfare, one of the busiest roundabouts during rush hour, stocked with large quantities of sniper ammunition. And that is what President Trump says is going inside his triumphal arch in the middle of a major traffic circle. We've seen this new pattern emerging, Trump shifting his messaging strategy when his construction projects hit legal challenges. This happened when the ballroom began hitting some legal roadblocks. He started framing that project as a national security imperative. And he is now saying the same of his proposed triumphal arch, which he claimed for the first time this weekend is going to double as a top grade military complex.

I want to read to you a little bit from his social media post.

[08:39:58]

He says, "at the strong request of the United States military and for national security purposes, I have agreed to convert the magnificent triumphal arch, planned since the civil war era many years ago, at the receptive circle adjoining the Arlington Memorial Bridge into a top grade military complex/slash triumphal arch to house, store and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus snipers on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage."

Now, this arch is going to sit in a traffic circle that's directly between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. And a group of veterans have sued to stop its construction. They are arguing that this 250-foot-tall structure is going to block a historic view that has long been a symbolic civil war connection between the north and the south.

And this is the first time that the president has floated any sort of military justification for this arch. It's not been part of any of the designs or concepts that have gone through a pair of federal agencies that oversee the architecture and design in Washington. And these revised plans have not been reviewed by the public. One source involved in that effort noted to CNN that the public should be much more concerned if munitions and explosives are potentially being stored in the middle of this very busy traffic circle.

John.

BERMAN: All right, Betsy Klein, thank you for sharing your reporting.

With us now, Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury, a Democrat from New Mexico.

Congresswoman, great to see you here in person.

REP. MELANIE STANSBURY (D-NM): Great to be here.

BERMAN: I know you're here the week for the U.N. and whatnot.

How do you feel about the president's new justification for this 250 foot arch as a kind of sniper outpost?

STANSBURY: Well, there's such a high level of absurdity around the entire thing because Washington, D.C., already has an anti-aircraft and protection system that is in place from the military. But that arch not only would directly block Arlington Cemetery, it also is a hazard to the airport and potentially to other military infrastructure.

But I think the biggest piece for me, especially as somebody who has veterans in my life, and my own partner, who is a veteran of the Marines, is that it is so insulting that Donald Trump wants to build an arch to himself in front of one of the most hallowed grounds in our nation's capital, where thousands of veterans are buried and would obstruct the view of the Unknown Soldier. I find it disgraceful. I think he's going to lose his lawsuit. I think his public statements up until now have made this clear, he's building this arch to himself. And I'm proud and grateful of the veterans who are suing right now.

BERMAN: You are on the House Oversight Committee. If Democrats take control of Congress, Oversight will have the ability to conduct hearings and whatnot. For you, what would be the priority? What would be the first thing you would want Democrats in the majority and Oversight to do?

STANSBURY: Well, I think we really have two huge tasks. One is to tackle the abject corruption we see coming out of this White House. And I think secondly, for me, it's getting justice for the Epstein survivors, which we've spent much of the last year trying to pursue and been blocked at every single stage as the president has used his cabinet, the War Room of the White House, the Situation Room, to try to stop the release of Epstein files.

But, you know, Donald Trump is, I believe, the most corrupt president in history. It eclipses anything we've ever seen. And I think that our job is to investigate the corruption, to make criminal referrals for when a DOJ is able to prosecute any potential crimes in the future and to change the laws to make sure that this can never happen again in the United States.

BERMAN: There are some, perhaps independent voters who hear an explanation like that and say, OK, you know, oversight is one thing, but does this mean then that the next two years are going to be tied up with nothing but these prosecutorial like hearings here? Does this mean that Democrats are going to be focused more on that than focused on diesel prices or the problems of the American people?

STANSBURY: No, no, no, absolutely not. I mean, you asked about the Oversight agenda, which is the committee that is the investigative committee. I mean, our agenda is very clear, we are trying to tackle costs, corruption and care. The American people right now cannot afford to put food on the table, a roof over their head, gas in their car. And our number one priority is to tackle the economy, which the president has trashed through his war in Iran, and the tariffs and all of his policies, like the big ugly bill. And so, our job is going to be to fight for the American people and to lower costs and to help support them.

BERMAN: So, the president this morning just put out a statement blaming the high diesel prices on Ukraine again. He says, "Russia has unfortunately lost control of its diesel oil industry due to its war with Ukraine. A large number of their diesel refineries have been blown up and are at least temporarily out of commission. This ridiculous and never-ending war with Ukraine must be ended. The whole world suffers as 25,000 people, mostly soldiers, are being killed each month."

I suppose he's blaming Russia too there for that, but saying it's because their refineries are being blown up.

STANSBURY: I mean, Donald Trump is trying to distract from the fact that he took us into a war in the Middle East that was illegal, unconstitutional, which Congress just voted last week was illegal once again, and which is driving up oil and gas prices to the highest level they've ever been.

[08:45:02]

Diesel is at the highest cost it has ever been in the history of the United States, which is making it more expensive for you to buy groceries, to fuel up your car, to transit to anywhere. And that is because of Donald Trump's illegal war in the Middle East.

BERMAN: Chuck Grassley, senator from Iowa, Republican senator, just said that diesel prices are killing farmers in Iowa, and his proposal is for a diesel export ban. Is that something you could get behind?

STANSBURY: I mean, what we need to do is end the illegal war, and gas prices will go down.

BERMAN: You are here, again, for the week, the U.N. General Assembly going on. What's your focus this week? What do you hope to leave the fine city of New York with?

STANSBURY: Well, I'm just so happy to be here. Obviously, this week is U.N. General Assembly. Donald Trump will be addressing the world on the world stage tomorrow. We're here to show global climate leadership, that the United States is not stepping back in spite of the administration. And for New Mexicans, which are the state that I represent, to have a seat at the table, our tribal and rural communities, who are really on the front lines with drought and catastrophic fires, and to demand climate action and help plan for a more resilient future.

BERMAN: As I said, everyone who comes for U.N. week enjoy the hotel prices and the traffic.

We are glad, though, you made it in. Thank you very much for being here, Congressman Melanie Stansbury. Appreciate it.

Sara.

SIDNER: Thank you so much, John.

New this morning, a string of rare childhood cancer cases is raising major concern in a California suburb. Families in Ladera Ranch have seen multiple cases of Ewing sarcoma. It's an extremely rare cancer that typically starts in bone or soft tissue. A community group has formed saying they have counted at least one case a year since 2021, and they want answers. How can so many children connected to the same place develop such a rare cancer?

CNN's Julia Vargas Jones is joining us now with this story.

What are you learning here?

JULIA VARGAS JONES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Sara, so many more questions than answers. And I really mean that. This is a community that has just taken it upon themselves to figure out what was going on with their kids.

One of them is Lily Dalton. Just 23 years old. She's a recent college graduate. She died in January after she battled an extraordinarily rare cancer that shares that same genetic makeup of Ewing sarcoma, without getting too much into the science here. But that cancer had also claimed the life of Brody Matteson. And Brody was an extremely beloved student athlete, a star football player in Ladera Ranch, lived just about like five, eight minutes away from Lily, where they grew up. When he was diagnosed, his family started hearing about this and how rare this was, but they started looking into it. The community kind of woke up in the moment and started comparing their notes. And that's when they come up with that number of one case a year for a few years.

Now, CNN couldn't independently verify those numbers. And you can imagine that because of a medical privacy laws, those numbers are difficult to obtain. But (INAUDIBLE) California Department of Public Health has said that there are fewer than 11 cases in the area at this time.

Now, residents, like I said, have started taking this into their own hands and trying to figure out what is it about their own community that could be causing this, and is it something in the community that's causing it at all? Is it the water? Is it the air? Is it the soil? Is it the pesticides?

SIDNER: Yes, there are a lot of questions. And we see one of the meetings there in Orange County, which is packed with people from the community.

Are officials going to investigate this because in part of these community groups that came together and said, hey, there's a problem here?

JONES: One hundred percent. And that is, in part, a lesson to other communities, too, Sara, because they were able to get the attention, not only of their HOA and of their school district, which have since paused spraying some of these synthetic pesticides in the community, have really taken issue with, even though there is no proven link between those pesticides in this particular part -- type of cancer, I should say. They just said, let's just try to stop all pesticides from being sprayed in our area.

But then they did get the attention of supervisor Katrina Foley in Orange County, as well as the attention of the California Health Department and the cancer registry. Now they are trying to answer, first, a more elemental question, Sara, which is, is there really a higher number of these cases of cancer in this community?

Now, when you think about it, 200 in the whole state, in the whole country, and then having one case a year for a few years here, of course, it's jarring. But one epidemiologist that I spoke to said, look, we still don't know if that really makes it a cancer cluster. That still has to be determined. And that is difficult for a community to hear. Of course, they're still looking for answers. They've started doing their own investigations, but it could just be a coincidence, they said.

SIDNER: All right, Julia Vargas Jones, thank you for reporting that story there from Orange County. Appreciate you.

John.

BERMAN: All right, new this morning, Patrick Clancy and his new wife, Rachel, in their first interview since the murder case against his former wife, Lindsay Clancy, ended in a mistrial.

[08:50:06]

Patrick shared what he said Lindsay told him moments after she killed their three young children.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATRICK CLANCY, LINDSAY CLANCY'S FORMER HUSBAND: She said it was like a dream and she remembered it much in the way you would remember a dream after waking up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Clancy's attorney argued she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis at the time. Now, Patrick also described trying to understand his ex-wife's mental health struggles.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATRICK CLANCY, LINDSAY CLANCY'S FORMER HUSBAND: I think I did the best I could with what I had at the time. And I live with the outcome. I live with it every day. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has she ever asked for your forgiveness?

CLANCY: No, but I gave it to her.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: A status hearing for Lindsay's case is set for September 29th. The local D.A.'s office has not yet announced whether it will seek a retrial.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right. Thank you, John.

Some of the top A.I. companies in the world are now being sued, accused of working together to slow down the progress of their own technology. We'll tell you more about that lawsuit ahead. And a high school teacher rushes into a burning home to save his neighbor. How everyone's doing from this incident this morning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:55:45]

SIDNER: On our radar for you this morning, shoe company Converse is apologizing for its new social media ad. The ad sparked backlash as the imagery evoked a Ku Klux Klan hood and lynching. The ad was pulled but was part of the campaign for the redesigned Chuck 70 sneaker in a collaboration with the K-pop singer. Converse, of course, removed this ad saying this, "we understand why this image is deeply upsetting and recognize that we got this wrong. This should not have happened, and we will do better."

All right, fire officials are calling a Missouri high school teacher a genuine, bona fide hero after he rushed into his neighbors burning house to save her. Clint Schneider says when he saw the flames he ran over barefoot and broke a window to get in. He then walked over the glass and, through heavy smoke, found his neighbor and managed to carry her out. Schneider says he knew she would need help because she was -- had trouble getting around, so he did just what he thought was necessary. Firefighters say this could have been a tragedy if not for his actions.

And in New Jersey, well, the couple got kind of a big surprise when they found a three-foot ball python wedged inside their car's grille.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, I have a bucket, but I don't have a lid.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Maybe we could just flip it on.

(Screams)

(END VIDEO CLIP) SIDNER: Yes, I think that's worth a scream. It took officers about 20 minutes to take apart the front of the car and get that big old snake out. Look at it. Once the snake was free, it was taken to a local animal shelter. Maybe you can adopt it, John.

BERMAN: Yes, that'd be great. I mean I don't have enough car problems already.

All right, Sara, thank you very much.

This morning, a new lawsuit against four of the biggest leaders in artificial intelligence claiming they violated anti-trust laws when they agreed to coordinate slowdown efforts. The lawsuit argues that these efforts by Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI and Google reduced the value consumers get for paid A.I. subscriptions. The lawsuit comes days after Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei published an essay arguing -- urging for development of rapidly growing technology to slow down and for the industry to implement stronger safety measures.

CNN tech editor Lisa Eadicicco is with us now.

This is an interesting twist, right?

LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: Yes, absolutely, John. So, as you mentioned, the concerns in this lawsuit really do largely tie back to the post that Dario Amodei published earlier this month, calling for a slowdown in A.I. development. And the concern here, the allegations in this lawsuit really say that consumers that pay for subscriptions from these companies do so with the expectation that each of these companies evaluates their own technology and acts on their own accord, rather than a broad, coordinated effort across the industry. And the concerns here as well, and the allegations say that, you know, without this competitive pressure to keep iterating on their models and their technology, they might not be motivated to improve their products as rapidly. And that can impact the products that consumers are paying for.

Now, the lawsuit does acknowledge that there are risks and concerns around safety when it comes to A.I. advancement, but that it should be up to each individual company to figure that out on their own and implement their own, you know, responsible practices rather than broad coordination.

But, of course, this is a really tricky subject because the main reason why the CEO of Anthropic even called for this slowdown is because there are no industry standards or broad regulation around the advancement of artificial intelligence. And it's something that there's a lot of focus and attention on now. And I think figuring out how to implement standards and regulation in a way where you're getting a mix of voices in the development process and ensuring that there aren't a handful of large companies that are, you know, influencing the direction of these standards is also going to be very tricky moving forward.

BERMAN: This is really notable because it adds this different still interest group here to this discussion, this urgent discussion on how to control or at least put guardrails up for A.I. And one wonders now, this will maybe, if they follow through with this lawsuit, take place in a courtroom, while business leaders are also meeting, while Congress may or may not be doing anything as well?

[09:00:05]

EADICICCO: Exactly. There's a lot going on here. They're calling for a trial by jury.